I. General Methodology of Codification of Jewish Law

Abstract

D to its exilic development since the beginning of the Common Era, Jewish law1 lacks a clear method for resolving disputes. Talmudic, medieval, and contemporary debates linger, since direct, categorical rules of resolution, such as majority votes of the Supreme Court in the United States or Papal pronouncements in canon law, do not exist. The exact reason for this is beyond the scope of this introduction, yet some methodological explanation will allow the reader to have a better understanding of the relationship of the modern classical work of Jewish law, the Mishna Berura,2 to other jurisprudential approaches to obedience to Jewish law. Until about two thousand years ago, the Jewish community had a “supreme court” called the Sanhedrin,3 a (parliamentary) joint legislative and judicial assembly that resolved disputes in matters of Jewish law by majority vote.4 Following the destruction